Ben Sargent by Ben Sargent
- June 12, 2009
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
- Next feature
- Current
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Steve Sack by Steve Sack
Drew Sheneman by Drew ShenemanAbout Ben Sargent
Tired of "politically correct?" Want an editorial cartoon that is quick to call out the bumblings of U.S. politics and cuts slack to no one? Pulitzer-Prize winner Ben Sargent is paying attention and making Washington have second thoughts about that little thing called the First Amendment.
© 2009 Universal Press Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (29) Jump to Comments Form
HOWGOZIT said, 4 months ago
Yes they have turned all their attention to the Fox news guys and Rush
Dale Hopson
said,
4 months ago
ANandy, it’s those to the right if the hate Bush crowd you should really be concerned about!
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
More history rewriting by the righties.
Tell us again how Tiller’s murderer, or the murderer at the Holocaust museum hated Bush, Fox and Rush.
Remember, if you don’t repeat it enough, it won’t become true.
HOWGOZIT said, 4 months ago
Post again then 28
Tigger
said,
4 months ago
Hate has been around since God Populated the Earth.
Andy, Wake up! Go out and Buy the 10 Commandments DVD and watch the entire Movie a couple times. You need to also watch the Bonus Features, then maybe you will wake up and see we are all pure evil not just Liberals.
cdward said, 4 months ago
Gang, I don’t think this cartoon is in reference to any particular party or political leaning. It’s about the hatred we see in such acts as the Holocaust Museum shooting or the military recruiter shooting – hatred that undermines the foundation of our country. How ‘bout if we all take a pledge to lighten up a bit?
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
Sorry, Howie, but weren’t you going to explain how Tiller’s murderer, or the murderer at the Holocaust museum hated Bush, Fox and Rush?
HOWGOZIT said, 4 months ago
No 28, I was replying only to ANandy’s post–was making no comparison to the two murderers hating (or for that matter, having any feelings for anyone.
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
Ah.
johnking said, 4 months ago
First, Ben Sargent has a lot of gall, being a perennial hate-monger himself.
Speaking of murderers, why is it any exaggeration to say that Dr. George Tiller was one? Yes, I can already hear the howls, but they will be from those who can’t answer my question.
deadheadzan
said,
4 months ago
Dr. Tiller performed late term abortions on such medical conditions as pre-birth dead fetuses that would otherwise not be born until the woman spontaneously went into labor. Can you imagine being a woman carrying a dead 7 or 8 month fetus? He also did late term abortions in case of severe fetal abnormalities. Whether you agree with the law or not, it is the law under which he legally performed late term abortions. The Tiller family should sue Bill O’Reilly for inflaming others to violence.
johnking said, 4 months ago
Absurd! Delivering a dead fetus isn’t any kind of abortion at all. That, aside from the fact that dead fetuses are not retained remotely that long. And, Tiller never restricted himself to aborting abnormal fetuses. If O’Reilly could be sued successfully for his harsh remarks, kiss the First Amendment goodbye. Not, of course, for leftists.
DrCanuck said, 4 months ago
Jo-king, it is an exaggeration to say Tiller was a murderer because, to be a murderer, one has to kill a person, and a fetus is not a person.
Akenta said, 4 months ago
churchill, if you’re going to assume someone is stupid, it will be more helpful to put in links that are easy to click on. Please put a space after the link so it doesn’t run into the next word.
Nevermind, I’ll help you out
http://tinyurl.com/nsvar
Adora68 said, 4 months ago
Check the updated news. The murderer at the Holocaust museum was a registered Democrat. He wrote tirades against Bush, Fox, and Rush.
So much for that theory.
danielsangeo said, 4 months ago
Adora68: I’ve looked for evidence and all I can find is a blog posting talking about von Brunn. Can you please show me evidence of von Brunn’s own words?
I also can’t find his party registration. Sure you’re not parroting Free Republic or Michelle Malkin?
What I have found, however, is evidence of hatred of President Obama, Judaism (which he claims is controlling Fox News), blacks, Marxism, Liberalism and complaints about the Democrats wanting to take his guns. He also denied that the Holocaust happened.
So much for that theory.
cdward said, 4 months ago
johnking wrote: “Delivering a dead fetus isn’t any kind of abortion at all.”
Well what would you call it?
My wife and I used to attend a grieving parents support group when our child died at birth (they told us 10 weeks before the birth that the baby would not survive). We thought about abortion but would have had to travel to the midwest, and we couldn’t afford it. Instead, we spent 10 weeks of strangers saying, “Oh, you must be so happy! When’s the big day?” The birth nearly killed my wife.
For what it’s worth, we loved that baby, gave her a proper funeral - but came awfully close to losing our minds. An abortion would have been painful, but it would have been a valid option in my book. Without one, we lost the child we knew were going to lose, AND I nearly lost my wife for no good reason.
And yes, a 7 or 8 month old fetus can die and be carried to full term. Members of our support group had to endure it. So back off!
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
John King, you have the worse kind of ignorance.
It’s the kind of ignorance that you aren’t satisfied just to wallow in yourself, but instead use it to hurt people you don’t even know.
Why don’t you get your medical facts from someone who went to medical school, instead of self-righteous religious fundies who just make them up to suit their needs?
fennec said, 4 months ago
Concerned, please drop all the 9/11 stuff. It is not appropriate in many of the ‘toons you’ve posted it on. And churchill, could you wrap it up please too. We now all have the links and the various reasonings you two have and that’s enough for me at least. Thank you.
believecommonsense
said,
4 months ago
cdward, I’m glad you and your wife came through that horrible experience together. Thank you for sharing that.
and your statement about the toon seems right on to me. This toon is about how blind, nonsensical hatred undermines our democracy. We are witnessing that fact now in our democracy.
666 guy said *It’s safe to assume von Brunn was an Iranian. *
is that supposed to be a joke? if so, not funny
again:
“von Brunn, the museum shooter/killer was an Aryan Nation white supremacist who hated Jews and blacks, that is NOT leftist thinking.
vonBrunn believed Jews are in cahoots with fed. govt to run the country to the detriment of white folks. That is not leftist thinking. He has an anti-government bent, that is not leftist thinking. He admired Hitler; that is not leftist thinking.
The hater’s rhetoric increased in volume with the nomination of Sotomayor …. Pat Buchanan was all over the airwaves saying the white man was the most maligned and discriminated against segment of U.S. society. That is not leftist thinking nor influence.
Inflammatory words can have consequences and some are thinly-veiled calls to violent action.
churchillwasright said, 4 months ago
^ It’s as much left wing thinking as it is right wing thinking, so save your one sided indigration.
believecommonsense
said,
4 months ago
nope, I don’t see any “leftist” thinking on what’s been made public about von Brunn’s beliefs. Cite the specifics of what you believe is an example of von Brunn’s “leftist” thinking?
churchillwasright said, 4 months ago
^ I didn’t say there was. I said there was as much validity in calling it left as right.
danielsangeo said, 4 months ago
^ Except that every single one of his rants are right-wing in nature.
motivemagus said, 4 months ago
Amazing how the right categorically refuses to admit there even *is* such a thing as right-wing terrorism in this country, ain’t it? The first response is “No there isn’t,” followed by “it’s really leftists,” and now “there’s as much validity in calling it left as right.”
No, there isn’t. There are left-wing terrorists and there are right-wing terrorists in this country. Von Brunn was right-wing. So were the Oklahoma City gang. The Unabomber was left-wing.
Of course, it’s really more complicated than that. What do you call the 9/11 terrorists? Religious extremism is traditionally “right,” but going after a symbol of capitalism is traditionally “left,” in the US, anyway.
believecommonsense
said,
4 months ago
churchill, cite the specifics of why you believe ”there [is] as much validity in calling it left as right.”
TrickyPickle said, 4 months ago
@CD and DR. Cannuk: It depends on when you believe a person becomes a person. If you believe this is the moment of conception, then taking that life at any point after is murder, not an exaggeration. It completely depends upon your definition of person. I think what John King was trying to say next is ‘Aborting a dead fetus is not abortion’ and not ‘You should deliver dead fetuses’. At least, I believe that’s what he was trying to say. Plus he pointed out that Dr. Tiller provided abortions to healthy late terms as well as dangerous late terms, which if true, allows those who believe people are made at conception to use the term murder. Of course, it also allows those who believe otherwise to protest the use of the word as incorrect. Since nobody has put forward a universally accepted definition of when human life begins, then both sides are correct and wrong at the same time.
Furthermore the actions of extremists, be they left or right, are almost certainly not to be taken as approved by their mainstream parties. That’s why they’re called ‘extremists’.
DrCanuck said, 4 months ago
Tricky: you have defined the two views precisely. Now, how do we solve this conundrum; what’s your solution? Shall it be done by vote, by majority? Is there some compromise? Shall we look to the authority of religion or the evidence and reason of science?
motivemagus said, 4 months ago
That’s the question. I may be biased, but I find more flexibility overall in the pro-choice side (most of whom would agree that late-term abortions are unacceptable in the vast majority of cases) than the pro-life side, perhaps inevitably since one thinks there is a critical turning point and the other evidently does not. Me, I’m pro-life and pro-choice. I think we need to reduce the need for abortion in the first place, which all pro-choice and some pro-lifers would agree with, by better education and birth-control technology. But a significant percentage of the pro-life movement thinks most birth control tech we have is in appropriate. (Pretty soon we get to the Monty Python level of “Every Sperm Is Sacred.”) I also think that science can be valuable in identifying a point at which we can be certain we are not aborting intelligent life.
I also think we can encourage and streamline adoption services, and try to support those who for whatever reason have become pregnant and cannot support the child. By that I include: (1) education to enable them to support the next child, (2) education to prevent this kind of unwanted pregnancy again, (3) societal support so they are not “encouraged” to drop out of school and feel comfortable carrying a future adoptee to term instead of an abortion.